Conservatives (Amongst Others) Won't Face Facts

Following Christopher Booker's article last weekend, we have a rebuttal in 'letters' this weekend from Zac Goldsmith - the 'Greenie' Tory - referring readers to the Conservative Party's document, The Low Carbon Economy, which he describes as "a detailed policy programme on energy" and which he urges all to read.

Very well Mr. Goldsmith, lets do that thing.

The Foreward, penned by David Cameron, states "We have a vision of a different Britain"; and "It is a vision of a Britain which leads the world in new green technologies"; and "Is this vision shared across the political spectrum? In one sense, I believe it is. Today, all the major political parties agree that this is what we must seek to achieve".

As the subject of energy is an EU competence - ie, a subject on which only the EU can dictate policy - the vision of which David Cameron speaks is not his vision, but that of our real government in Brussels and one which he is duty bound to follow without question. He is,of course, correct in that this 'vision' is "shared across the political spectrum" and that "all the major political parties agree that this is what we must seek to achieve" because all the main political parties wish to remain a member of the EU and are therefore beholden to the EU's energy policy!

So immediately we have the classic example of politicians lying to their electorate by (a) stating that the 'vision' is theirs - when it is not - and (b) that 'all the major political parties agree on this' by omitting the fact that they have no other option.

David Cameron ends his foreward with the words "This is a blueprint for a better energy future". Wrong Mr. Cameron, it is a policy driven by unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats over whom you have no control, based on ideas which have no foundation and which will 'cost the earth' - in more than one sense - to implement.

In the executive summary the document states "Britain is now in the grip of a full-blown recession and Labour’s Debt Crisis has put our public finances in chaos, with the worst budget deficit in the developed world."; and "First, it will strengthen our economy. Decarbonising Britain will help create hundreds of thousands of jobs...."; and "the reckless accumulation of debt in our economy means higher taxes for the next generation".

With Britain 'in the grip of a full-blown recession' and 'our public financies in chaos', the Conservatives plan to spend even more money on something that is costly, cannot be delivered in the time scale planned and which will not provide the energy that the country requires, Decarbonising Britain surely will create hundreds of thousands of jobs, not for the 'average man in the street' but surely for those 'environmentalists' whose latest conference admitted that science was not the objective but that 'political pressure' was. Not only will 'the reckless accumulation of debt mean higher taxes for the next generation', so will this so-called policy that the Conservatives are forced to adopt by the EU.

On page 3 of the document it states "we can meet our target to reduce emissions by 80% over 1990 levels".
Another lie here, in that the targets are not theirs - ie, the Conservative Party - but those of the EU. In respect of 'meeting our targets' - fact: the present government plans to build 25GW-worth of offshore turbines by 2020. There is not the remotest possibility that we could build the 10,000 giant turbines required, at the rate of two a day, when it takes weeks to install each vast machine. On top of which, of the giant barges needed for the work, there is but one in the world. (Christopher Booker - Sunday Telegraph 26./10/2008)

The document includes ideas such as "putting computing intelligence into electricity networks"; transform electricity networks with ‘smart grid’ and ‘smart meter’ technology so that the use of electricity for a wide range of household and workplace appliances, and the charging of electric and plug-in hybrid cars, can be tailored automatically to match the supply of electricity" (page 4); "vastly expand the amount of offshore wind.....power" (debunked above) (page 4); "electricity network operators to establish a new national recharging network" (page 5); "introduce a new entitlement for every home to be fitted immediately with up to £6,500 of approved energy efficiency improvements, the cost to be repaid through fuel bills over a period of up to 25 years" (page 6); "establish a new ‘top runner’ scheme to highlight the most energy-efficient household goods" (page 6): "fully implement the Energy Performance in Buildings Directive and require Display Energy Certificates for public and private non-domestic buildings over 1000 square metres" (page 6) (good heavens - actual mention of the EU Directive!) "immediately start work on establishing a new high speed rail network linking cities in the North and South" (page 6).

Initial question Mr. Cameron -and whose going to pay for all this? Let me guess - the taxpayer and consumer!

Page 7 of the document states "They buy us protection against the hazards of the future." What it does not say is that the hazards of the future are those imposed by our membership of the European Union and by God, were it possible to buy protection from that load of f'wits!

Under the heading of Social Justice (page 10) the document states "When families are being hit hard every time they pay their gas bill, fill up their cars or do the weekly shop, we can all see the advantage of moving to low carbon sources of energy and improving efficiency" - and who, Mr. Cameron, has been responsible for that? Not us consumers, that is for sure!

On page 10 of the document, the Conservative Party have the gall to quote "In The Wealth of Nations, Adam Smith (usually regarded as the apostle of the free market)" - but we haven't got a 'free market' Mr. Cameron because by your blind adherence to the principle of membership of the European Union it imposes regulations which are acknowledged go be counter-productive and thereby extremely costly!

Page 31 of this document discusses the question of low energy light bulbs and states "Until and unless a new generation of LED bulbs comes to replace the existing mercury-based bulbs, we will continue to face the need for a national collection and disposal network that will enable users to dispose safely of the existing low energy bulbs in accordance with the WEEE Directive" (God, another mention of an EU Directive!) And who brought in this stupid rule about low energy light bulbs? That's right Mr. Cameron, your masters in Brussels so, as it is a requirement that they be 'disposed of safely' you have no option but to set up yet another 'industry'!

I really cannot be bothered continuing to pick holes in what is, basically, a laughable proposal. When will any of the three main political parties, in one of their manifestos, actually say the truth - something like 'Look Mr/Mrs/Miss/Ms Elector, because of our membership of the European Union, in respect of matter xxxxx this is what we have to comply with because of our membership of the EU and here is how we think is the best way to adhere to Directive/Regulation xxxx'?

Just tell us the truth you b******s, that where the EU has 'competence' you are no longer able to formulate policies